The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 5, 2012, 10:59 AM   #26
doofus47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 1,279
30-30 is plenty good enough for any elk, especially if you're still hunting dark timber.
good luck!
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.
doofus47 is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 01:08 PM   #27
farmerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 1,343
If its not enough gun I wish someone would of told the cowboys and Indians back in the day. The 30-30 worked fine for them, I dont think anything has changed.
farmerboy is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 01:09 PM   #28
Deja vu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 14, 2010
Location: Border of Idaho & Montana
Posts: 2,123
I have seen elk killed with a 30 carbine. I am sure your 30-30 will be fine.
__________________
Shot placement is everything! I would rather take a round of 50BMG to the foot than a 22short to the base of the skull.

all 25 of my guns are 45/70 govt, 357 mag, 22 or 12 ga... I believe in keeping it simple
Deja vu is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 02:56 PM   #29
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 5,888
Quote:
If its not enough gun I wish someone would of told the cowboys and Indians back in the day. The 30-30 worked fine for them, I dont think anything has changed.
The 30-30 wasn't even sold prior to 1895. Wasn't a major player until after WW-1 and had to compete with the 30-06 at the same time. While it was used as a prop in an awful lot of movies, it simply wasn't used back in the day. Single shot rifles ruled the day for large game back when the cowbows and indians were fighting each other. Even hunters in the early 1900's knew it was a close range gun for that purpose and the bolt rifles, in better chamberings were available long before the 30-30 was invented.

But it will kill an elk if you are willing to accept its use at limited ranges. I'd not buy one for an elk gun. But if it is what I had, I'd go hunting.
jmr40 is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 03:05 PM   #30
Sweet Shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 17, 2011
Posts: 502
Okay let's take conversation a step further... and only because I've been pottering about with my cz527 in 7.62 x 39 lately. That's almost up there with 3030 right. Except that I've so far failed to scope it, maybe I should consider using that? It still has about 1300flbs @ 100 yards I think. It shoots tiny groups at the range and handles beautifully. I think there are some 125 gr softies available for it.

-SS-
Sweet Shooter is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 03:16 PM   #31
farmerboy
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 1,343
1895 is far enough back. I'm sure it's dropped some buffaloes back in the day too.
farmerboy is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 03:17 PM   #32
chewie146
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2010
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 853
The 7.62X39 is a fine deer cartridge, but due to the majority of bullet construction, I wouldn't probably use it for elk over a .30-30. You don't need to shoot the wings off a fly, but you will probably be better off with the increased penetration from the heavier bullet. If you do use the X39, get some corbon hunter ammo for it, as it's sending a 150 out there at 2300.

But, by saying all of this, I'm being a bit hypocritical, as I've killed a cow with Federal Powershok 130gr. 270s. Those are by far not a well-constructed bullet for elk. It only took 1 hit, though, and she went down. The range was about 120 yards. It's moving a lot faster than a 123 from a 7.62x39, but it's a worse bullet than a premium .30 cal.

What is the bore on that CZ? Is it .308 or a proper .311? Just like the .30-30, put your bullet where it matters. Lung shots that are broadside don't require much penetration or energy to shred some vital material. If you're Elmer Keith-ing it, then you're counting on a paunch shot angled toward the vitals. Neither of those cartridges are good for that. Of course, in my book, that's a crappy shot to take to begin with, and shouldn't be done except as a secondary, follow-up shot.

If you're patient, you can get a good broadside shot. I've only ever gutshot one cow, and that was when she was moving away after I double-lunged her. The second shot put her down.
chewie146 is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 03:19 PM   #33
math teacher
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2012
Location: Southwest WA Coast
Posts: 315
I am afraid the Sweet Shooter is putting himself at a disadvantage hunting elk with a 30-30. I tend to agree with Rgrundy that elk are a tough animal. I killed one with a 30-30, but was not impressed. While most of my rifle killed elk have been with a 7mm mag, there are lesser cartridges that are quite adequate such as the 270 or the 30-06. I have seen several elk shot with the 30-30 that ran off not to be found. Perhaps the shots were not perfectly placed, but that is the point. Brian, in your hands I am sure a 243 is adequate, but for a beginner I cannot recommend either a 30-30 or a 243. Not unless that is the most they can shoot accurately. I will concede that as Jack O'Conner said, where you hit them is more important than what you hit them with.
math teacher is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 03:26 PM   #34
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,582
mathteacher, did you watch the video post above?

If not, here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18

Makes it tough to argue against the 243. That's almost 700 yards. Must be 2 1/2, 3 times farther than the longest shot most hunters will take.

As long as you've got enough energy to reach both lungs, the ONLY thing that matters is shot placement.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old September 5, 2012, 04:36 PM   #35
sc928porsche
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2008
Location: now living in alabama
Posts: 2,433
Keep it within 75 yards and you will do fine.
__________________
No such thing as a stupid question. What is stupid is not asking it.
sc928porsche is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 06:28 PM   #36
rgrundy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 188
The problem with people who have killed or talked to people who brag about killing elk with small calibers is that very few will ever admit to the ones they wounded that got away. I know this happens. I've had to help run down more than a few and some were never recovered. Most of the time the lack of enough damage to get some blood trail led the hunter to believe they had missed because elk show little reaction to the shot many times.
Sweetshooter the snow in moderate amounts is your friend. I have a little sled that I drag them out on when I can. It's very little effort on fairly level ground.
rgrundy is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 06:50 PM   #37
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 6,757
Peetza-

The thing that amazed me in that vid was the fact that that animal was hit at all..... you can hear the wind blowing pretty hard in the audio, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't constant over the course of the bullet's flight path..... that was either some world class wind doping or just dumb luck..... There's some luck involved, too, even if the feat of wind feading was spot on: A .243 105 gr VLD, even if launched at 3000 f/sec (!) will take nearly a second to reach the animal.... hoping that animal (some of the others were moving) does not move in that second is risking a gut shot, unrecoverable animal.

How many times did they try this stunt and it did not work out so well?
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 06:58 PM   #38
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,582
I don't know how many they woumded at long range, but I do know that it should be obvious that the cartridge is not even close to marginal for close range shots.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rgrundy
The problem with people who have killed or talked to people who brag about killing elk with small calibers is that very few will ever admit to the ones they wounded that got away. I know this happens.
Big deal. In my area, we've hunted deer for decades with 12ga shotguns that generate up near 3,000 ft/lbs of energy. I have seen and found quite a few that were wounded by bad shots.

Oddly, when we hunt them with archery equipment, even though we still wound them, I know of and find far fewer wounded animals than I do those wounded with shotguns.

Is 3,000 ft/lbs not enough for deer? Would ANYONE make that argument?

I doubt anyone would, yet, if you hit them in the vitals, they die, if you don't they don't.

It's not the gun that matters, it's the shooter.

I would propose that more animals are wounded by hunters using mega-louden-boomers who wrongly think they can make up for bad marksmanship with power than there are animals wounded by "undergunned" hunters.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old September 5, 2012, 07:06 PM   #39
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 6,757
Quote:
I would propose that more animals are wounded by hunters using mega-louden-boomers who wrongly think they can make up for bad marksmanship with power than there are animals wounded by "undergunned" hunters.
On the theory that the lighter calibers are more pleasant and economical to practice with, and therfore actually practiced with more, I'll agree.

All things being equal, and they are not, more energy and penetration is better.
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 07:12 PM   #40
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,582
Only up to a point.

Is 3,000 ft/lbs in a bullet that exits the animal and deposits 2,000 ft/lbs in a tree on the other side, using 1,000 within the animal better than 2,000 ft/lbs that exits the animal with 1,000 ft/lbs remaining, using 1,000 within the animal?

If the lungs are pierced and there was 2,000 ft/lbs used in the animal, will it be more dead that if the lungs are pierced and only 1,000 ft/lbs was absorbed?

Given an identical shot with an exit wound, would a .308 kill better than a 243? A 7mm WSM? A 300 WinMag? A 12ga slug?

No. As long as both lungs are pierced, the animal has taken it's last breath. It will be dead in 5 to 15 seconds, depending on if it was at full inhale or full exhale or in-between. Doesn't matter if it was an arrow, a 223, a 243 a 30-30 or a 50BMG.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old September 5, 2012, 07:17 PM   #41
Edward429451
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2000
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 9,494
Quote:
Is 3,000 ft/lbs not enough for deer?
I read an article by some old timer before where he was explaining that boy, you better make sure that you'll have at least 250 Ft LBS of energy at the Deer or Elk to ensure a clean kill...

So yes, a 30/30 would be fine for Elk. Choose a good bullet that's not likely to break up, and pass on those 400 yd shots. My son took a big Elk with a 308/180 and he only went over one ridge and into the next ravine, perhaps 75 yds from where he was shot.

Quote:
It's not the gun that matters, it's the shooter.
There you go. ^
Edward429451 is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 07:58 PM   #42
PawPaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2010
Location: Central Louisiana
Posts: 3,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peetza
mathteacher, did you watch the video post above?

If not, here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY0w1c-gf18

Makes it tough to argue against the 243. That's almost 700 yards. Must be 2 1/2, 3 times farther than the longest shot most hunters will take.

As long as you've got enough energy to reach both lungs, the ONLY thing that matters is shot placement.
I don't know that I'd have taken that shot, but I'm simply amazed that there are places where you can see to shoot that far. I'm a Louisiana swamp hunter and 200 yards is a long, long way where I hunt. Still, it's hard to argue that the .243 won't do it. I find it interesting that they were using the 105 VLD, which I always thought was a target bullet, not constructed for game. I stand corrected.

I shot a little deer two years ago with a .243 at about 120 yards. I was using a 100 grain Remington Core-lokt pushed to over 3100 fps. The bullet took the little buck just behind the shoulder, exploded on a rib, and destroyed the on-side lung. The deer hit the ground, got up and walked into the woods. I found him about 40 yards away, DRT. When that bullet came apart, it destroyed the shoulder, and while the deer was very, very dead, I thought it was a pretty rude way to treat a game animal.

Interesting video, but again, I don't know if I'd have taken that shot without lots and lots of practice at extended ranges.

I do have a little .243 Savage 10 that I've been thinking about pulling the barrel and putting in a heavier barrel in a 1:7 twist. It's been something I've thought about for a couple of years and next year might be the time.
__________________
Dennis Dezendorf

http://pawpawshouse.blogspot.com
PawPaw is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 08:04 PM   #43
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,582
I wouldn't have taken that shot, no way.

In reference to the Core-Lokt, I saw the same thing happen with a 140gr Core-Lokt from a 7-08. Close range, bullet disintergrated. Killed the deer but didn't leave a good impression. That was my uncles deer, we both use Barnes TTSX now.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old September 5, 2012, 08:13 PM   #44
rgrundy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 188
Brian, I watched the video and I must say that was quite a spectacle. How many elk have you actually killed. DIY? Bulls? Cows?
rgrundy is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 08:15 PM   #45
SavageSniper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2005
Location: Crawfordville, FL
Posts: 494
Brian you are soo right with your statement of a hole in both lungs and they are dead. Period. It amuses me as to how some folks act if they are offended if someone tries to shot anything larger than a possum with anything smaller than a belted magnum. Dead is dead. Of all the deer that I had taken in my life with every thing from .270, '06, 308, buckshot, 223 or what ever. All of them did one of 2 things. They either piled up right there or ran about 50 yards.
The 30-30 is plenty gun out to 150 yards or so. You can kill an elephant with a toothpick if you put it in the right spot.
__________________
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights!
SavageSniper is online now  
Old September 5, 2012, 08:23 PM   #46
rgrundy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 188
How many elk do you have in Florida? What experience do you have?
rgrundy is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 08:23 PM   #47
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,582
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgrundy
How many elk have you actually killed. DIY? Bulls? Cows?
Zero.

Does only personal experience count? Does learning from others mean nothing? I have a friend who has hunted near Paonia Colorado for many years. He hunts with a 47 pound bow. He's taken many elk and been told many times that 47 pounds is not enough. He has never failed to shoot THROUGH the elk, including a large bull, 6x7, I think. He knows quite a few people out there. He knows men and woman who hunt elk with a 243. On purpose, they have other guns.

I've also had this very conversation on this forum several times over the years.

You don't have to believe me. Doesn't matter. You use what you want, I'll use what I want. I've seen enough to know what works and what doesn't.

30-30 is enough gun for elk. So is the 243. You don't need a 338 Loudenn-boomer to kill them. Lots of people with lots of experience agree with me. Lots of people who *think* you need magnums because they've seen "Cartridge X" wound an animal, disagree with me. Elk are not that tough. Their lungs deflate when you poke holes in them, just like mice and elephants.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old September 5, 2012, 08:27 PM   #48
rgrundy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2012
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 188
I've guided when I was younger and hunted them all my life so I know a little about it. I'm 64 and shot 2 last year and packed them out myself on DIY hunts. I know too that the only reason you need to shoot them that far away is that when it's cold and you drive up to them they get spooky watching the truck. You got lucky.
rgrundy is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 10:07 PM   #49
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 6,757
Quote:
It's not the gun that matters, it's the shooter.
Also "up to a point", though the shooter is the largest variable in the equation, by several orders of magnitude.

The gun matters, as does the bullet.

That super-duper 700 yard .243 VLD is a pretty thin skinned bullet, I understand ....... a close range shot would likely result in "the hickey from hell"..... the bullet disintegrating on contact.

As others mentioned about the Core-Lokts, I've had a light-for-caliber bullet come apart at close range- a .270 WIN 130gr Winchester Silvertip (it's been awhile- not sure if they even make those anymore.... I don't recall seeing them on a store shelf for at least 10 years) at about 15-20 feet.... made a wound about the size of my fist, and about as deep. Far side lung was intact ...... the deer went a good 100 yards, leaving a little blood ..... yes, he died ..... but I found him by pure chance- I was not real good at following a sparse blood trail ..... still not great at it. I've since switched to 150gr bullets- A nearly identical set-up: broadside 1 1/2 y.o. buck at 15-20 feet. The 150 gr bullet going slightly slower blew pieces of lungs out the 1" hole in the far side and sprayed them out in a nice pattern for a good 10 feet. This deer ran near 100 yards, but with every stride (or maybe each heartbeat?) there was a huge gush of blood sloshed on the ground that a blind man could not only follow, but would have to take care not to slip on and fall.......

The gun and bullet are a system.... The bullet has to be pushed fast enough to expand, and at the same time not so fast that it comes apart .... more mass helps as does modern engineering (chemically bonding the jacket to the core, Solid copper or guilding metal bullets, thicker jackets or other design elements such as dual cores (Partition/A Frame).... The bullet has to have enough mass and energy to penentrate deep enough to fatally damage vital organs..... sometimes under less than perfect circumstances.

Will a 30/30 or a .243 do that on an elk? Yes, but I think there are better choices. YMMV (and probably does).

By the same token, going to the other extreme is not good either- An 8mm Remington Magnum isn't a good elk gun, either, as the teeth rattling recoil in a gun light enough to carry all day would deter sufficient practice, at least by me.... a Barret .50 BMG is likewise overkill ... even the healthiest of us would not enjoy humping a 30 lb rifle in the high country......

But some folks like a challenge, I guess..... so if you think you can do it with a 30/30, go for it.... just don't complain when the only shot you get on your once in lifetime (or maybe it's a once in a year thing, you lucky dog) hunt is standing there quartering away at 250 yards .... a long shot for a 30/30..... a chip shot with a 7mm Mag ..... if the shooter is up to it.
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old September 5, 2012, 10:38 PM   #50
Edward429451
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2000
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 9,494
Not sure if you've ever hunted Colorado, but 250 yds would be kind of an unusual shot here. Perhaps up in Wyoming you get long shots. The Elk are in the timber here and typical shots are 100 yds or less. A cake walk for a 30/30. You do have to use a good bullet but I think that how tough Elk are is exaggerated. If I were to take a 30/30 for Elk I would use a hardcast 311291, a 170 gr and feel totally confident in it inside 100 yds.
Edward429451 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.15029 seconds with 8 queries